I have a set of OHM 1000 speakers and I’m constantly impressed at the way they reproduce sound, especially piano and acoustic guitar. Many times, I feel like I’m listening to a performance rather than a recording, and that still amazes me after having the speakers about 10 years. My speaker search has ended. The only change I would make is up grading to a larger Ohm speaker in the future

As a singer in a large symphonic choir, I sing with professional orchestras several times every year. I've also been an audiophile for over 40 years. No system I've ever heard - even systems costing well north of $100k - comes close to the sound of a live orchestra.

Storytime With Steve...should be a regular feature.

Years ago, working in NYC at a recording studio, The Hit Factory, we were recording a name act singing a duet and laying down the strings. I was just standing around and heard the orchestra start playing and I was like, oh shxx, we're back from lunch already. I turned quickly around where I was, 10 feet from the cello section, and my jaw hit the ground to see that we were not back in yet and what was playing was the track from the morning session, playing through the sound system of the studio. I had to walk over to the speakers which were aboutish 8' off the ground (?), built into the wall and only protruded 5-6 inches. Or 8. It was a while ago... Lot's of room treatments in a band at the speaker level around the room, below, around the room were flat absorbent panels. The speakers were JBL labeled with coaxial drivers, not unlike the Urie 813's but these were 18" drivers and I don't remember what, if anything else was in the box with them. And yes, as Steve mentioned that might play a part, it was one of the bigger rooms at the Studio. I'm a cellist, occasional front of house mixer (Jazz/Classical concerts) and lifelong audiophile. I don't fool easily. There was no opportunity for critical listening, but the experience left me convinced that it is possible to recreate live sound. All you need are custom speakers from a company that was near the top of their game, a large dedicated and treated listening room and the master tapes. :-)

Wow look at all those glorious CDs. Long live the CD!

I’d hope that audiophiles take take time to go listen to live music, concerts, and occasionally hire a musician to play an instrument(s) and/or sing in your listening room. It keeps your listening ears humble.

Wow. This sparked an important realization for me. I was at an electronics convention in the mid-1980s and heard a live acoustic jazz performance behind a curtain in a large space. I walked to the other side of the curtain, only to find that it was a modest-sized Bose stereo system. To my teenage ears, it sounded breathtaking. Steve, you've made me realize that it was likely a combination of the recording being played at a realistic volume and the reverberation of the space that made it sound so real.

*Strictly Anecdotal* A college friend was studying music for a degree in organ performance. He showed several of us a recital organ at Indiana University by playing some Bach and Widor. We were properly amazed, both at the instrument standing over us, the sound washing over us, and his virtuosity. As an enthusiastic electrical engineering student, I asked him if any of the new electronic concert organs could match that sound. "No," he replied. "All electronic organs sound like they're coming through a big radio."

When I was in college (ca. 1972) I visited the modest apartment of an audiophile friend. There, dominating his tiny living room, sat a pair of EV Voice of the Theatre speakers (don't know what model, but my recollection is they were each about 4' high, 30-36"wide and 24"deep). He was listening to a record by a jazz ensemble who's name I don't recall. I still remember the experience like it was yesterday: I could hear the clicking of the trumpet keys, the sounds of the sheet music being shuffled on the music stand. I remember closing my eyes and listening, and hearing the group live, just a few feet behind the speakers, as if in the kitchen. I've never heard anything like it coming out of an audio system. I guess THAT would be MY last set of speakers.

Sometimes I wonder how often "Audiophiles" go to proper live concerts...

I just love how personal you make your videos. you have so much personality and this is a big factor for why I think your reviews are so amazing. Keep doing what you are doing. by the way; love the shirts

I think it's because the shape of the sound, the 3-dimensional "sound field" created by real instruments (say a grand piano) can never be correctly captured and reproduced by stereo mics and speakers. Mics captures only a snapshot at certain points in space, and speakers reproduce the sound with their own particular sound shape or "sound field" that are completely different to the original instruments'. The brain seem to be very adept at detecting this, and when you add room interactions into account, it becomes even more easier to distinguish. That said, binaural recording and playback is getting very close to the real thing, provided other qualities like dynamics are good enough.

‘Is it live or is it Memorex?’ As the advertisement used to say back in the day. The only times I can remember being fooled like that was in large open rooms with large speakers. Horn speakers like the Klipsch Cornwall in a large open room, with a good recording with a lot of space in it will get you close to what your after Steve. But we all want it in our living room from a pair of bookshelf speakers... just ain’t gonna happen. But we can keep trying... the Holy Grail of the audiophile!

Who ever said live music sounded so great? I guess the pursuit started with people who grew up only listening to live music but the majority of us now have heard way more recorded music than live music.

Excellent video. Here are four things which in my experience contribute significantly to “sounds real”: 1. The speaker's power response (in addition to its on-axis response) should be spectrally correct. This is illustrated by the PA speakers (reinforcing piano and violin) which sounded realistic from afar, as in general PA speakers have considerably smoother power response than cone-n-dome speakers because of their more uniform radiation patterns. Likewise the Altecs in the theater had good power response. 2. The ear is able to hear very deep into the reverberation tails, arguably even down into what we might consider the "noise floor", by recognizing the harmonic structures. This means that the reverberation tails can contribute a lot. This is illustrated by your friend being able to hear room size OVER THE PHONE. Imo this is an argument against overdamped listening rooms, and as well as for otherwise getting the reverberant field right. 3. There is typically a competition between the venue cues on the recording and the venue cues of the listening room, and the ear will pick the most plausible cues to form its impression of acoustic space. The highly unorthodox Snell Type One system had exceptionally benign room interaction characteristics, allowing you to hear "less of the playback room" and therefore “more of the recording venue"... even if the acoustic signature of said "venue" was entirely created by the recording engineer(s). Note that when playing your tapes over the Altecs in the theater, there was no competing "small room signature" from the playback room. 4. Preservation of dynamic contrast also contributes to “sounds real”, and I suspect that, along with the aforementioned absence of “small room signature” and good power response, contributed to the Altecs in the theater sounding so realistic (despite their having mediocre frequency response, by audiophile standards). Likewise the PA speakers reinforcing that piano and violin probably had minimal thermal compression, and they were probably getting an uncompressed signal. These aren't the only things that matter of course.

The closest to real life I ever heard was in an audiophile store in San Diego around the late 90s. I was checking out a pair of electrostatic speakers, Quad ESLs I believe..maybe coupled with subs. They played a jazz recording. I was aghast when I heard high heeled shoes walking from my front-right towards the center. I could hear her step up onto a wooden stage and then the band played, she sang. It was as if invisible ghosts were in the room performing right in front of us! Of course they had set up a near perfect listening environment. The speakers were well away from the back wall and probably had great acoustic treatment. But I never got over how real those electrostats sounded.

Finally a good video from this guy.

Here's what I think.. A speaker is a universal medium. It can simulate any frequency but It will never sound like any "one" instrument because what makes an instrument unique IS its unique resonances. A flat surface like a cone driver can not ever truly reproduce the infinitely complex sound of a three-dimensional instrument.

I've heard several systems over the years that have given inklings of the real thing. One that sticks out, was the flagship Von Schweikert 'Ultra 11' speakers in a big room at the LA Audio show a few years ago. We went from playing orchestral music, to small jazz ensemble, to a guitar playing singer, and they reproduced each to a very accurate scale, dynamics, timbral correctness, with no dynamic compression. But all we can really hope for, is a "window" to the original musical event, not a reproduction of the actual musical event. As systems get better and better, the "window" gets larger, cleaner, less distorting, etc, but we can always tell we are perceiving it though a window.

As a 40+ year designer of electronic musical instruments that are meant to sound acoustic, I've always been intrigued by how you can tell the difference between a cheap piano and an expensive piano while listing to an AM broadcast over a pocket radio.

The most 'live' sounding speakers I've heard were the big Maggies powered by a McIntosh amp. Very live sounds come from planar magnetic headphones, too, assuming you've got enough current to drive them to moderate levels.

I don't think sounding like the "real" thing is necessarily the best sound you should be looking for as an audiophile. There are a lot of problems with listening to live music, and you can often get a better experience listening at home, or even through headphones than you necessarily will get at a live performance. Glenn Gould much preferred listening to music at home, and dramatically changed the tonality of his piano playing during production, including splicing together different takes of a single movement. I would prefer to listen to a Gould recording at home over a lesser pianist live, while sitting far away and off to the side in a less than ideal performance space.

It just shows how much the room itself "plays" a big role in the overall sound. I moved a couple of years ago, from a smaller apartment, too now living in quite a big livingroom (25-30 M2 - square meters), and the change in sound was huge. The reverb of the room itself, make an impact when playback, but somehow i like this more, as now i really can hear into the room were the recording was made, and it sounds for me more "natural" (whatever that means)? ;-) It shows again how important the room is, and how much improvement you can get by room treating. Stay safe..cheers.

Since you're hearing what the microphone hears. You're not hearing a cello on a recording, you're hearing a recording of a cello.

Mr. Guttemberg, I have to confess something: I generally hate videos themed on what I call a "talking head", a face talking without showing the object of my interest. BUT, it's completely different with your videos, not only because they are dense in matter but also because of the genuine enthusiasm with which you present them! It always seems to me like that conversation with a very wise and much loved teacher after class with a lot of attention. Thank you for that. Greetings from Brazil.

Steve: Love your stories man! You take me right there, thumbs up, love all your videos, reviews, stories, gear recommendations etc, we appreciate your work man, thank you, keep the videos coming, action! print'em roll'em!

For a larger sound stage as well as more of a "I am there" feeling and sound, I use a 4 channel stereo system with floor standing speakers up front and stand mount speakers just forward of me on either side pointing at each other. The imaging is great and the soundstage is huge. As far as realism, this setup is only slightly more realistic than just the front speakers as far as instrument reproduction but it definitely makes the room bigger and helps immerse me in the music.

Yep you're right, really amazing hi-fi still sounds like hi-fi. No mistaking a live instrument.

Back in school in 1980 or so, a room mate brought a set of STAX HEADPHONES he had gotten for Christmas. We put on THE DIREC TO DISC DARK SIDE OF THE MOON. To this day, I have never felt such musical amazement..

Can a speaker sound like the real thing? YES!!! In many live performances the speaker is the real thing and that is what it sounds like.

I think what distinguishes live from recorded music is DYNAMIC RANGE. When I am walking by a house with someone playing a piano or organ when the windows are open, especially, it is very apparent which is which. It's the contrast between the quiet notes and the loudest ones. A recording can't normally do that.

Re: Break on through to the other side ... I've experienced a set of loudspeakers sounding like a live performance only once. A pair of vintage Tannoy Eatons driven by quite a powerful push-pull tube amplifier in a space used for intiment concert venues. At the time, I was at a location that obscured a direct line of sight to the audio source. Only when a pop came through from the record being played was the illusion broken. I remember being confused in the moment, and then upset just after. Been yearning for that moment ever since.

Some years ago I experienced the playback of a child's voice only, no instruments, singing. Source was an old 78rpm record from the 30’s. HiEnd turntable, arm and cartridge. 3W Tube amp. Speaker, a 5in Focal mounted at an odd location on a 4ftx2ft.75in plywood sheet. Front side of plywood a thick felt covering. Backside about 2in of sound absorptive material. Close your eyes, forget the ticks and pops and that kid was right there in front of me. I’ll never forget that.

Interestingly , at the end of this there are some car horns. In the background clearly on a street outside Steve’s room. A common occurrence, especially in a city. Off in the distance but clear and you can hear an element of reverb (a sense of “reflection” off of other buildings?). There is a palpability to those “car horns”.....even through my etymotis plugged direct into an iPad.

Imagine trying to capture a water balloon exploding with a coffee cup from 3 feet away. That's what you are doing when recording an instrument with a microphone. The instrument is throwing out a sphere of sound in ALL directions..... and the sound is different in every direction. And all those different sounds are interacting with the environment. How would you expect that microphone to pickup the actual sound of that instrument? Then on playback... you play back on a loudspeaker that is certainly NOT omni-directional. Even if it was (like an Ohm) .... you are only feeding it that 1% perspective that the microphone had. I think the fact that stereo sounds as amazing as it does, is a miracle....... and i'm not complaining!

I went to a live performance of a famous pianist playing on a huge Bösendorfer. It turned out to be amplified through the hall's PA system. MP3 + earbuds on a mediocre phone sound better :-( Gone is the liveliness, gone is the sense of direction, gone is the Bösendorfer sound, gone is the timing (you hear everything several times from several speakers + the piano). Unbelievable that the performer or his representatives ever agreed with this. So this time I had to go home, listen to my stereo to come a lot closer to live performance...

I think this is the best piece you ever did. It sums up what someone who first is into all kinds of music and someone who can tell the real from not in the most subtle unexpected moment. Your examples reflected moments in my life when a what was that happened. One day driving home from work ages ago playing a cassette, classical music and all of a sudden there is a violin solo where I do not recall a violin at that point. While waiting to turn left I look out my window and see a kid practicing a violin while waiting for a bus, rather well too. I love those kinds of moments and they fill my brain with what to notice when I play my system.

I have Klipschorns in a very large room with high ceilings. The soundstage in enormous and at times you really feel its a live concert. My guess is the room size and how sound bounces around, compared to a smaller room and speakers.

There are probably two competing factors. One is how well the original recording captured the acoustic space where the performance was done as well as the sound of the instruments themselves. The other is how well the speakers can deliver that sound to the listener without allowing the acoustics of the playback space to affect the sound. At best, it appears that the recorded acoustic space would be reproduced in the plane of the speakers and behind. But such a window into the acoustic space of the recording would be great.

Whoever shares this passion are always searching

A system that can give you sounds that seem to come behind you will sound more real. There used to be a device which I have somewhere that would add to the rear sounds. My system does not sound like a live rock band but I did a comparison once between my favorite music hall (Synod hall) and my system and to me the sound was the same.

As always Steve you bring up interesting questions although in this case I'm not sure that I accept your basic premise. As a record collector turned recording engineer a long time ago , it was my dream to have control over the sound of a record and make them sound the way I wanted them to sound. I don't try to make them sound"real" so much as making them sound hyper real. A certain kind of visceral quality that would have impact whether on speakers at home, speakers in the car or on headphones. For jazz, for instance, it's the first row in the club where the music hits you hardest. Or for pop, somewhere inside your head. We use so many imaginary spaces and twirl them around inside the song that sounding real becomes irrelevant.

Electronic classical organ manufacturers continue to try to accomplish this, making samples of real instruments sound as true to the real thing as possible. You should check out the technology of the Allen Organ company in Pennsylvania. They also design and manufacture their own speaker drivers and cabinets, and implement technologies based on "sampled acoustics". It seems like the museum you were in coloured the sound and made the PA seem like it wasn't there until you got close.

Steve,Chris Picquet here again.i forgot to mention that I had a pair Peter Snell's type 1 loudspeakers.the most bizzare things I ever saw,but great sounding! I still have the type 1 crossovers.cabints and reflector tongue on bottom were really beat up.great speakers,eloborate crossovers.

If you want reality, use PanAmbiophonics to eliminate crosstalk and get the real room back. Playing my Ambiophonics system with my eyes closed, the boundaries of my room disapear and I'm immediately transported to the studio or hall in wich the recording took place.

I would say it happens a lot with my DALI Rubicon 8 speakers. For the most part due to the high fidelity and gigantic sound stage. I hear sounds so real I think there's someone standing in my hallway making the sounds. And if it's a good audiophile recording it's very close to the real thing. Elements of the music are absolutely as they are in real life.

Its the same with KZfaq content. Sometimes you can spot good sounding equipment in the videos. Even though you listen through your mobile Phone!

A little late to the party and long time viewer but recent subscriber. To Steve, very good piece and I want to add an angle that you made me think of while I listened to your KEF LS50 Meta review. In that review, you were very impressed by how the Meta sounded like an open back speaker such as the Magnapan, and other similarly constructed speakers, which have an open sound because of the nature of their construction. You were very impressed that the Meta exuded the same "sound" beyond the rear of the Meta even though it is a closed cabinet. Well, my system amounts to a low budget system today but it now sounds exceptional to me now because you made me think to turn around the top speaker, away from me, and face the top speakers towards a hard surface so that the sound could reverberate and create space and a broader soundstage. To be clear, I have the Triangle BRO3 and B&W DM600 speakers stacked atop 44" tall tower speaker cabinets that are not hooked up. The Triangles are also turned upside down so the tweeter is closer to height of my ears in a sitting position. So when you made the comment about sound coming out of the back of the open construction speakers, I decided to turn the DM600's to the rear and towards angled hard surfaces. It worked. Gracious, it is now even smoother, is clearer spatially with what I think is a wide soundstage that has depth. I'm sure this has been tried before, I just haven't heard it mentioned. Just wanted to share that approach.

Very interesting vlog Steve. I saw Pink Floyd out doors in the rain. It was the Animals tour. They had the quadraphonic p.a. Gilmore would hold a note and it would sail around the stadium just above our heads. Great, great sound. Our stereos of the time were horrible but we loved them. We didn't expect much. They did not sound real at all. Now in my old age about the only music I can even listen to live and actually enjoy is unamplified. San Antonio has a wonderful acoustic space. The Tobin Center. The symphony sounds perfect. Small scale acoustic music does as well. But amplify it and its suddenly overdriving the space. We saw Tedeschi Trucks at Red Rocks. At first it sounded perfect, being an open air venue. About halfway through they started turning up the volume. By the end I was covering my ears. Maybe it's that the guys at the sound board aren't *audiophiles*. Generally I prefer the sound of my own system to live music.. Sometimes I get surprised and live music sounds great. Usually not. For most of us. I think the illusion of the live event is a matter of scale. It's lot to ask our systems to produce live scale.

If all audio setups were listened to blindly with no knowledge of any of the components, people would save a lot of money.

I was at a Grateful Dead concert in the late sixties - early seventies. This was in an auditorium at Wichita, Ks. For me, it was a matter of reality pursuing reproduction. The soundscape was incredible. The music was loud, but well balanced, the sound was wonderful. I thought at the time, "This is like sitting in an audiophile boutique." Of course, they were doing the leading-edge thing. This was not the acoustic soundscape of a piano concert, choir, or orchestra in an acoustically wonderful auditorium. This was electric, and what better thing to do than to make sound like the best audio system you can imagine. At least, that was my impression.

Recorded music is a construct. RE: your interview with engineer concerning 20 different compression types.

I think the importance of "mood" is underestimated. Some days my system will sound absolutely "real" and other days it will just sound like a couple of speakers. Also, the quality of the recording is critical; not the bit depth but rather the actual quality of the recording.

Regarding the subjective experience of a film surround sound audio system. I once attended a performance of the NY Philharmonic being conducted by John Williams. The climax of that performance was a segment of Williams’ score for the film E.T., being played by the orchestra while a large drop-down movie screen behind the the musicians simultaneously showed the final 10- minutes of the film. It was magic. I completely forgot awareness that the score was being performed live, and was emotionally pulled further in to the film on the screen via the musical performance. There was nothing in the live performance to distract from, or to otherwise pull my attention away from the visual story on the screen. No dynamic limitations, or distortion, or artificial sounding tonal coloration. None of the unpleasant things which can indicate that the music was being reproduced , yet at the same time, none of the pleasant characteristics (in a multi-channel hi-fi sort of way) which can indicate that the performance was live either. While the live musicians, and the sound they were producing disappeared from conscious awareness, they simultaneously increased my emotional involvement in the story on screen. So, I concur, that surround sound which has the intention of being noticed, of overtly justifying its existence, of being an effect for effect’s sake, is the wrong objective. From my above experience, I’d feel that the right objective is to produce sound, surround or not, which emotionally pulls the film viewer in to the story without their being consciously aware of that occurring.

I have a modest setup, but I love it. (emotiva airmotive 4s + chord mojo) I feel I get 'closer' to breaking through the more I am able to relax and be mindful of the music. I suspect there is a paradox in there because a LOT of audiophile listen critically, not mindfully. And I find that some DACs present in a way that makes it easier to be mindful. This, like so much else in this hobby, it likely subjective.

I’m a t traditionalist, old school, a purest, 2 channel man, analogue man. I have listened to good 5.1 systems and above, and they can be impressive, but not real, because as you rightly say, all the visual action is happening in front of you, so your brain naturally expects the audio to come from the same source. If a car travels from left to right across your screen, your stereo set up can mimic that pretty well! It must be more complex to accurately mimic sounds of what your not being shown, and that is where you stray from reality, or, at least, the illusion of reality!

In the 1970s I had a pair of Sonab oa12 speakers. In the dark the sound was just real. I haven't heard that realism since with any other speakers.

Hi Steve I've always felt that listening to a good quality old record from the seventies made of the thicker vinyl and a good turntable always felt much more real to me like the band was performing in the room right there in front of you!

The music sounds more real when you see the band is playing. That’s what I found when I was watching Joe Bonamassa’s concert at the Greek Theatre on blu-ray. The band sounds so much more real than it was played on CD.

On piano and chamber music, I heard performers play and then the recording of that performance reproduced on Cabasse speakers in the same hall. That was 30 years ago and it was practically impossible to tell a difference between the live and the reproduced performances. They even performed blind tests behind an acoustic veil. Impossible to tell a difference. Very impressive, but I feel it would have been quite another story to capture the sound of a big orchestra in a perfect recording and have it reproduced as convincingly.

I am a speaker. You are a speaker. My room is a speaker. We are all speakers.

Time, Place, Mood. Well said, Steve. Audiophiles, good audiophiles with a lot of experience with music, live music, understand that the reproduced music is "Artificial" and although that said, doesn't necessarily make it "False", but is understood to be an artifact of live music and what the expectations may realistically be. The quest is in satisfying to a greater or lesser degree, what that cumulative aural memory has been. This is a fascinating topic and you are doing a hell of a job bringing this to light. Thanks.

A long time ago I had a matrix decoder. I had a fairly large listening room. I had tri-amped JBL 4343 speakers in the front and ADC 450A speakers in the rear. I adjusted the rear channels to not be almost unnoticeable. The sound was pretty darned good. Eventually something went wrong with the decoder and I abandoned the rear channels. Sometimes I still miss them.

i saw a video awhile back where it was a grand piano in this large rectangular room and then set up a multitude of mics at all different locations through out the room. and it did provide somewhat of the energy described but i think that may be too complicated to produce with several instruments. i agree a quality set of horn speakers get you close where when close mic'ed to a Sax you can actually hear the resonance of the sound coming from inside the instrument when played at reference levels.

Fascinating conversation. As much as I can simply enjoy listening to studio CD's on a decent system, the most enjoyable moments are when that break through happens. After all the work to evolve your system to be as good as possible in your room, you have to have good media. As a result, I prefer recordings of live events with minimal sound processing or compression. I think the keys to the system include the room (and treatments) and a system that is as simple as possible. Digital with very good clocks. All triode amps. Minimum passive components. Minimum of crossovers. Large open transducers. When music is recorded and reproduced with lots of micro details the crossover is more likely. When you spontaneously experience the emotion of the performer, the magic happens. There are songs that will cause tears to well up every time I hear them. Not because I relate to the words, but because I have a sympathetic reaction to the recorded state of mind of the performer as expressed in their performance.

I enjoyed every minute of this one. I've had similar experiences and thoughts. BTW, the old Whitney had the biggest elevators I've ever been in!

Back in the 60's/early 70's Acoustic Research did many live vs recorded public demonstrations. Listeners could not reliably determine when the music changed from live players to recorded. TBF, this was most often with a string quartet so there wasn't an extreme range of frequencies/volume but still, if that could be done in the 1960's, one would expect it to be no problem at all now with modern speakers/amplifiers, recording equipment.

I listened jazz vinyl on hand made HiEnd turntable + huge, huuge vintage speakers and yes i think it can sound close to live. There is no real audiophile experience without huge speakers and analog input, period.

Just before lockdown - I did get to listen to the opening track of Kind if Blue “so What” from a vinyl sourced played thru the new Michi pre amp and 2 Michi power mon blocks - into B&W 803s - now iv sat in bands and herd trumpet players up close - and this was an eerie experience- but still not quiet right as it picks up what the microphone herd and not what I hear normally - you never really want to get that close to a trumpet

I work from a warehouse and my work hifi always sounds much better than my much more expensive home set up.

No matter how good the audio setup is you can only get there if the recording accommodates that. Boingo Alive would be an incredible album to listen to with a really nice setup. I've never had the chance but I have enjoyed it with a decent mid range pair of IEMs and my phone's built in quad DAC. The album was performed exactly as it would be live in a live setting but sans audience and with high quality recording equipment

I went to a presentation by Peter McGrath a few years ago at my friendly neighborhood (well, nearby large city) brick-and-mortar dealer of some 4 channel recordings that he had made. The front channels over Wilson Alexx speakers were the more direct recordings of the musicians with the back channels over Wilson Alexia speakers being primarily of the ambiance of the venues. These were 'live' recordings so there was some cross bleed between the 4 microphones, of course, but you get the idea. You could still tell that they were reproduced performances, but it was quite an impressive demonstration of multi-channel music recording and playback done right.

Many, many, too many tears ago, I remember listening to a quadraphonic music demo set up by AR (Acoustic Research) in a small listening room at Grand Central Station in New York city. It was open to the public. This was in the late 1960s. If I remember correctly, they were playing mostly jazz like Dave Brubeck or the Modern Jazz Quartet, etc. To this day, I have never again heard anything so realistic, so live, so "you are there" as that demo. Steve, as a New Yorker of a certain age, maybe you remember this, as well?

Like the culinary arts, audio reproduction equipment is created from the perspective of the designer. As a musician and restaurant owner, even in real life, the way a concert sounds varies tremendously depending on whether you are observing from the conductor's perspective, or multiple arrangements elsewhere. With food, I don't always value traditionalism - differences are what keeps things fun, interesting, and human.

I figured it out 47 years ago. I'm an engineer. I understood the problem, I patented the solution, I built it. It works. There was no interest in this industry. My prototype is probably the only one that exists.

Klipsch La Scalas are a one of the kind product. It's music like I had never heard it before.

Steve - Thanks for this video. This is a very interesting discussion of reproduction of the sound of reality. I have given up on recreating live sound in my home system as an ultimately hopeless and expensive quixotic quest. Now, instead, my audio goal is to have a system that sounds good to me, which in large measure means that it lacks artifacts and irritants (e.g., harsh sibilants and boomy bass) while doing a decent job at resolution, dynamics, impact, PRAT, and soundstaging. Perhaps I am no longer an audiophile, but rather, an euphonophile, if I may coin that term. I had several concert experiences that led me to believe that nothing sounds as real or as good as unamplified acoustic music. One experience was attending several opera/art music vocal recitals in which no microphones nor PA system were used. Particularly memorable for me was a recital at a medium sized auditorium in Richmond, VA in the mid-1980's in which Leontyne Price sang accompanied by only a piano with no microphones nor PA system. No recording of her voice played back on any audio system that I have ever heard has reproduced either the quality or the quantity of her voice as it filled and pressurized that auditorium. By the way, the audience demanded and she delivered six encores, and she received seven standing ovations that evening. A second experience was in the late 1980's to mid-1990's when I lived in the DC metro area and subscribed to the Smithsonian Institution's Resident Associates concerts. Most of the jazz concerts in that series were held in the Baird Auditorium and used microphones and a PA system. However, there was one jazz concert in the Baird Auditorium that I particularly recall that did not use microphones nor a PA system. That was a concert by James Dapogny's Chicago Jazz Band. What struck me was that with the microphones and PA system, the performances in the Baird auditorium did sound real and live, but the sound quality, while very good, was not as good as the sound of unamplified instruments, which of course, also sounded real and live. I think this is consistent with your observation that sonic reality and liveness are not just about sound quality. I also once attended a B.B. King concert at which the PA system played so loudly that the sound was severely distorted - or was that due to my fingers being in my ears as I tried to reduce the pain and preserve my hearing? I can't recall whether or not the instruments sounded real, but the pain was certainly real. Unfortunately, it seems that the sonic attributes that are necessary and sufficient to reproduce the sense of reality and liveness are currently unknown.

Great video like always thank you Steve!

One of the reasons I prefer 'live' on stage orchestral / choral recordings. You get all the ambiance and sense of space rather than, the 'sterile' acoustically dead sound of a recording studio. And, I suspect, this is one of the reasons recording engineers often add, artificial depth / ambiance in some recordings. I stand to be corrected if my assumption is incorrect

Every concert hall sounds different, great composers were working with what they had as instrumental sonic choices. A modern musician may never fully convey what they have in their mind into the studio or the track. To me the search for purity is a silly vision, one born of equipment makers who are trying to convey their vision of creating equipment that produces a flawless delivery of content. It’s a good goal for equipment, but as a listener, I want my sound to be even better than the limitations the composer or studio stumbled on in delivering their vision. Further my vision and interpretation of the piece is equally valid, but infinitely more meaningful for me personally. I feel more compelled to participate in sonic maximization as a pursuit of purity, extracting the euphoria from the recording rather than the time and temperament. The room, the speakers, the amps, the dacs, the mics, the wood winds, the sheet music, the composer, they’re all distortion between us and the emotional Euphoria of the composers mind. Whatever we do at the playback level to reach that Euphoria is the greatest act of purity. We can perfect every link in the chain, but we also have to bridge that sonic euphoria from our playback equipment into our own minds through our own tastes. But yeah if we get our equipment (speakers) to sound like their equipment (pianos) we’re that much closer. But in the absence of that reality, we not only need to but should do heavy lifting on the playback side to bridge the Euphoria wherever it’s dropping out.

if you really carefully listen to live guitar piano or vox vs reproduced you will find the live version WAY WAY more dynamic and much louder in all the essential ways than an amplifier and speakers can give you (in 99% of the cases anyway)

You can make a surround system that gets close to being there but the cost is prohibitive compared to a 2 channel system that achieves the same thing.

Hey Steve,it is possible to create lifelike sound in your home (provided you have the space!) Large horn loaded speakers need space! There tends to be some serious room anomaly issues those type speakers without room treatment.(people waste their money on big speakers in small rooms) low frequency waves are long and need space! I designed and built a pair of 6.5in. two ways that that recreate the realism and immediacy of a live performance in a smaller room.(took me two years and lots of money spent on the highest end drivers available in the the early 2000's.(scanspeak,dynaudio,focal,vifa,seas,Eton,etc...) The pricey drivers sounded the worst! All focused on bass performance,rather than seamless mid-range transition to the tweeter! Goal: to reproduce the transparency of Quad Esl 57's with the impact and speed of Pro Audio speakers.i have upgraded some vintage Klipsch Heritage's and very happy with the results.a good friend who designs tube amp and refinished ESL 57's laughed at me initially until he heard them! He stayed at my house for 4hrs. listening.

Really enjoyed this episode, as I can relate to your experiences so much. Hearing a live piano away in the distance, and knowing it was someone playing it live, right then. It struck me too and made me wonder over the years, what is different about that sound, that gave it that quality. Like you I think, never really came to a satisfactory conclusion. Certainly not one that you could act upon, and create an environment, with audio equipment, that could recreate that conviction that you were listening to something 'live'. Loved this episode, thanks.

As a film sound mixer I can attest that most mixes are still all about the action in front of you, but to hear a fantastic mix with lots of surround ambient play the Master and Commander film, especially the under the ships deck sequences are breathtaking. Personally I fell in love with electrostatic speakers back in the 70s listening to a friend’s Quad EL59s playing Shirley Bassey of all people (not a fan) as a budding HiFi nut I never heard anything like it before. I have owned many speakers including the EL59s but still prefer the openness, speed and unrivalled voice authenticity of electrostatics.

Most people could not handle the volume of live venues long before they get overwhelmed with sheer volume..........So to have that at home would not be something I want.I personally go for what sounds good to me which is not the same as real.

I had an almost real experience in a live setting. We had just recorded live and were playing it back from a digital mixer on the house speakers. Since digital mixers capture what is coming in and the settings, it was possible to replay (and even remix) the live music.

Only recently learned surround channels in 5.1 are not supposed to be behind you, they are supposed to be on your left and right side, then very slightly back. 7.1 adds the rear surround channels. For quad or music mixed in 5.1, for me the goal was never to become more “real”, it was to explore the studio produced work, recorded on 8 or 16 and up tracks, on more discrete channels, thus providing more discrete resolution for the individual tracks in the mix. You get to hear more of the acoustic guitar part, for example, if it gets its own speaker. My brain then gets the fun of resolving the mix. I always viewed recorded sound as it’s own medium, not a wanna be imitation of real sound, so I now understand why most - if not all - actual audiophiles disagree. I started with Strawberry Fields and I Am the Walrus, maybe that’s why “reality” was never the point, in the first place.

“Is it live? Or is it Memorex!” Even experiencing music as it is performed is complex. As Steve illustrates here (I think) a lot can depend upon the listener’s position to the performer(s) and the environments (his and their(s). Sit row one in Carnegie Hall vs row thirty (or the balcony) left, center or right will impact what you hear. Now. How does a recording engineer a producer record the performance? What microphones are used? Then analog and digital conversion, mixing? This is getting complicated. Even before your sound system and your listening environment comes into play. Say the music is amplified. Wow. Hard to determine what is “real?” What is the “true sound” ? This is why we flock to remastered stuff or music remixed from the “original” masters. In essence we are at the mercy of others making myriad decisions leading up to a record, tape, CD, stream whatever. Take the “Stones” ....which is more “real”? What Mick and Keith “ signed off on fifty years ago or what they remaster those songs today? With a likely different perspective? And then how come we have exciting performances on old 78’s we revere? Would they be more exciting if magically re recorded today?

Yes at CES with the MBL extreme omnidirectional system. It was very very good.

I’m surprised you didn’t mention binaural recordings over headphones. The first time I heard one of those I was seriously impressed. Still am, actually. But as you say, it’s still possible to get a better sense of “actually live” through a phone (despite which none of my iPhone bootlegs have ever sounded anything but crap)

The 'real thing' though is the environment it was recorded in, aka the reverb and reflections and the distance of the walls wheb recording the tracking if each instrument, then the mixer takes all these tracks which are sometimes recorded in different rooms with different reverb etc and then sits in their small mixing room with specific room treatment etc and mixes the song according to their taste when these tracks with reverb etc are played back in their mixing room with either more, less or the same dimensions and reverb and frequency response and they make it how sound what they consider good in their mixing room. Then you play it back in your listening room playing the mix or a song in the mixing room sound or the instrument recording which had a different sound to the mixiny room now played back in your room which ads reverb and reflections and different frequency response and speaker positioning.... The only way you could heard hat that instrument sounds like 'in real life' would be for musicians to record in an anechoic chamber and then mixers to mix in an anechoic chamber and then the sound you would hear from your speaker would be only the direct instrument sound on the recording and the added real world reverb etc of your room, aka what it would sound like in your room. Then it would sound live all the time and accurate for your room....and everyone would hate making and recording music...but it would sound great at home.

I have been to, literally, hundreds of live shows in many different venues, from bars to outdoors, to historic theaters, Stadiums, clubs, symphony halls and everything in between. I enjoy music. Everything from classical to thrash. "live" can not be duplicated, sorry. Even studio is tough to reproduce accurately, let alone perfectly.

Hi Steve, I have almost the same experience last year and I am going to share. Thru out the years, like all audiophile, I have been looking for audio gear that could reproduce music as close as to the real thing: "live music". I was invited to a country club party last year, there was a 8 persons band playing some nice music on a stage. the room was pretty big like the size of a gym, while I was enjoying the music, I turn around and talked to my friends for about 5 minutes, suddenly I heard a very nice song performed by the band, lively and energetic, so I turn around and could not believe my eyes, the stage was empty! the band left for a break, and they were playing a recording of the band, and I could swear they were playing live. This incident changed my believe, it was not the audio gear, it was the room, the environment, the space that create the "Live sound", the recording is more important, the room, the acoustic and may be DSP might be part of the answer?

I'm a lifelong musician as well as an audiophile - - regardless that I'm a drummer I would guess that like myself, many people have had an experience or two where they could hear a drummer somewhere in the nearby neighborhood, there's just no mistaking real drums, even at some distance, someone slamming around on a drum kit with a window open or in a garage with the overhead door open is simply unmistakable - - by the same token we've all certainly heard sound systems from a distance - - same deal, no mistaking, at least in most instances that a DJ at a party or someone blasting their stereo is not live musicians playing music. I think most of us would agree that there must be multiple factors at play and that it’s also a reasonable assumption that the stereo playback system is only a part of that equation. Too bad all of the physicists are busy studying black holes.

Nice video Steven. I've often thought that the two instruments that come across as being realistic in stereo reproduction are the clarinet and the saxophone.

wow thanks for mentioning the type 1 ... it was my first hi fi lust object i ever heard at a dealer

Great topic! Super interesting too. To me, "live" music is when you are hearing only real instruments played. Like a symphony orchestra. A rock band blasting away on a stage loaded with a huge PA setup is NOT "live" in the sense you are hearing the actual instruments playing. You may be there experiencing the performance "live" and may get a a mixture of say, the drum kit with the amplified version. Steve is right, as many other commenters here. The brain has a way of using psycho acoustics to differentiate a speaker cone vs actual instruments playing. I hear a grand piano is one of the most difficult instruments to record due to the endless overtones is produces. Steve's experience of hearing the piano and violin down the hall and in a room vs being right in the room makes sense. I bet if a sound person could switch back and forth between just PA or just actual instruments, way down the hall by the elevator, one may be hard pressed to say, "oh ya, I can hear the difference easily".

Yes they can sound real. However, most system do not but they do sound good. For most audiophiles that’s good enough.

Very interesting subject, I think it's a bit like trying to make a camera take a picture which looks like reality. The answer surely lies in our own sensory perception, a large part of our senses is dependant on our brain which we don't fully understand, our eyes seem camera like and our brain computer like but the reality is much more complex.